I'm thinking about picking up a used digital SLR body and a lens or two, to be mostly used for outdoor photography. My bias is toward Nikon due to reputation and a wide availability of equipment and lenses. I've used a Nikon D70 a few times in the past, as well. I've never owned any camera other than a party clicker.

Looking around on local Craigslist over the past few weeks, I see more D40s than any other type, usually in the $300-$350 range for a body, one lens, and basic accessories. Any comments on, or landmines to watch out for, with this model in particular? Any other models I should be looking for instead?

I don't have thousands of dollars availlable to spend on photography gear at this point, but I do have opportunities while hiking and traveling to take some amazing pictures, and would like to have a camera that can record reproduction-worthy images. If I can do that for under $500 then I'll probably pick up something in January or February.

Nikon and Canon dominate the SLR photography world. You'll probably want to choose whichever of these two brands your friends and family use so that you can borrow their lenses and accessories. Sony is another option. If you have access to lenses for old Minolta Maxxum SLR cameras, they'll work with Sony Alpha DSLRs.

The Nikon D40 is a discontinued model that is more primitive than currently-offered cameras, but it is the cheapest way to get into the Nikon DSLR line. The D70 that you used is more capable than the D40, especially in its ability to auto-focus with the AF-D lenses that do not have auto-focus motors built into the lens. Besides the currently-offered Nikkor AF-D lenses, you'll find that they are plentiful in the used market. For the low-end Nikon D40, D60, D3000 & D5000 DSLRs, you'll need to stick to AF-S lenses for auto-focus. The D50, D70, D80, D90 and the semi-pro and professional Nikon DSLRs can make good use of the less expensive AF-D lenses.

First, you can't go wrong if you choose one of the two major players in the DSLR market; Canon or Nikon.

I own a Canon 30D DSLR and a Canon Ftb film SLR. I have usedCanon: 20D, XT, XTi, XS, XSi Nikon, D40, D3Pentax: k20D

I very much prefer Canon DSLR cameras because I find them to be very convenient and intuitive. As far as I can tell, low end Canons are much superior to low end Nikons. They have better image quality, auto focus and controls.

If you have not invested in lenses already, look into the entry level canons. A used XT or XTi would be great.

I would not get a D40, the biggest problem with them is they have a horrendous auto focusing system. A camera that takes blurry out of focus pictures is worth nothing.

Nikons are not bad cameras by any sense of the word, you just have to move up their product line to get comparably good products. Unfortunately that also increases the cost.

Thanks for all the suggestions! I might be willing to give a Cannon model a try, none of my nearby friends or relatives are into high-dollar camera gear right now so I can start from Ground Zero with either brand. My dad might still have a couple Nikon lenses from his own SLR days but those are at least 35yo.

Manual Nikkor (AI-S) lenses from 1977 onwards can work with modern Nikon DSLRs. The Nikon D200, D300, and more expensive professional DSLR camera models are able to shoot in aperture priority mode (auto exposure time based on camera metering with manual selection of aperture) with these lenses. More affordable Nikon cameras can use these lenses in fully-manual mode. Nikon F-mount lenses from before 1977 (some of them going back to 1959) may require modification before they can be safely mounted to modern DSLRs.

You can take excellent photos with a D40, and it's an affordable step into what can become an expensive hobby. Just recognize that it won't be too long before you'll be wanting to upgrade to a better camera like the D90 or D300.

On the Canon side, all EF lenses produced since 1987 are fully compatible (auto-focus, auto-aperture, auto-exposure) with all Canon EOS cameras.

Looking around on local Craigslist over the past few weeks, I see more D40s than any other type, usually in the $300-$350 range for a body, one lens, and basic accessories. Any comments on, or landmines to watch out for, with this model in particular? Any other models I should be looking for instead?

As others have mentioned, the D40 and other bodies in the same "line" have some limitations to at least be aware of. The more you know before you buy, the better as every body and system has its own set of tradeoffs.

ludi wrote:

I don't have thousands of dollars availlable to spend on photography gear at this point, but I do have opportunities while hiking and traveling to take some amazing pictures, and would like to have a camera that can record reproduction-worthy images. If I can do that for under $500 then I'll probably pick up something in January or February.

Just about any DSLR, new or used, that you're likely to run across fits that description. For sure anything including the D70 generation and later (about 6 years). New bodies do add capabilities, but digital cameras have been pretty good for quite a while.

My preference in Nikon is to go for at least the D70/80/90 or D200/D300 level of camera for ergonomic and feature reasons. In terms of straight-up image quality any camera with the same generation and size sensor and equivalent glass is going to be about equal. The bodies I mentioned, while more expensive than the d40-level cameras, can autofocus with a much wider selection of used and older glass. This can mean dramatic savings where the real money is (glass). If you're looking to buy one camera and one lens, then think long and hard about what you really want. The strength of SLRs is in the system.

The D80's meter has a reputation for being wonky in matrix mode and overly biased toward the active focus point. The D70 is a fine enough camera, but the newer cameras of the same level and up have a noticeably nicer viewfinder.

There's nothing wrong with the D40's image quality at lower sensitivities. I've used one quite a bit and it's a fine camera. Limitations include autofocus only with generally pricier AF-S lenses, fewer advanced options, and three selectable AF points. If you're used to a higher end Nikon these caveats may be particularly frustrating, but otherwise it's not bad as far as cheap DSLRs go. I've never had autofocus problems with it in decent light. Nevertheless, I wouldn't spend much on one now.

There's nothing wrong with the D40's image quality at lower sensitivities. I've used one quite a bit and it's a fine camera. Limitations include autofocus only with generally pricier AF-S lenses, fewer advanced options, and three selectable AF points. If you're used to a higher end Nikon these caveats may be particularly frustrating, but otherwise it's not bad as far as cheap DSLRs go. I've never had autofocus problems with it in decent light. Nevertheless, I wouldn't spend much on one now.

Up to ISO1600 there is nothing wrong with the D40!

I agree that you shouldn't spend $350 on a used one. I found a Nikon refurb for that, which includes a warranty and didn't have any scratches or sensor dust.

The main erk with the D40 is lack of direct control. You have to cycle though menus like a point and shoot. Thankfully, it does it faster than any point and shoot I've ever used.

If there is light, the kit lens is great. It sounds like you'll be doing outdoor/day stuff so the kit lens should be great.

The D3000 is really slow. I think it has the same processing speed as the D40, but more "features" to slow it down. I think this might be a case of less is more. The D3000 also has worse high ISO performance than the D40 for some reason.

The D3000 is really slow. I think it has the same processing speed as the D40, but more "features" to slow it down. I think this might be a case of less is more. The D3000 also has worse high ISO performance than the D40 for some reason.

The D3000 probably has diminished high ISO performance compared to the D40 due to more MP being crammed on what is probably the same sized sensor. Different noise reduction algorithms, sharpening algorithms, and jpeg compression (if shooting in JPG mode) algorithms will effect noise as well.

Granted this is anecdotal evidence, but I have a couple of friends who own D40s and I am amazed with the quality of images that those cameras produce. Even at ISO 800, images have an acceptable amount of noise.

Irregardless of your choice, when you jump from a P&S to a dSLR or similar, you are in for a treat. The only real drawback for us techies is photography becomes an addiction and you will always be left wanting the next best piece of glass, or the faster/better in low-light body. I bought into the m4/3 system do to its small size vs. performance, and now I have a few lenses. Now I find myself waiting for the next body to come out in hopes low light performance is better, and they finally include a focal distance indicator. Focus-by-wire lenses do not indicate infinity focus on the barrel.

My recommendation is stick with the used camera path, get a decent lens to go with it (in this class, the lens will be the biggest advantage), and see if you really like it or not. Drop too much money on a better camera, and you may find it makes a nice paperweight later and regret it. dSLRs are large, and they tend to not go most places like your P&S.

The D40 does a little better with high ISO noise than the D70s (which is no slouch itself, for the price). The D70 has a few more features - a focus motor, dual control wheels, and a wireless flash Commander mode, to name my favorites - but if one just wants to set an Aperture/Shutter priority, or shoot fully automatic just to take advantage of the larger sensor and better glass over a P&S, the D40 rocks.

Okay, per the EOS Rebel XS recommendation, I see this package on Amazon. At $450 that's within my budget for a starter kit, especially after accounting for the additional cost of a spare battery and a couple SDHC cards. In the future I would probably want to add at least one telephoto-capable and one macro-capable lens to my kit.

Is this a good way to start?

Alternately, it appears I can get a used D70 body for about $315-350, with the associated risks, and would then have to scrounge up at least one lens and probably some accessories.

The Rebel XS would be an excellent way to go and you would have a vast lens selection to choose from. Its quality is good, low light is good, features and usability are solid, etc. I have a hard time seeing you disliking it over a D70 or D40, unless you just plain don't like Canon's ergonomics.

Once you've got the camera and the kit lens, you'll need a couple of SDHC memory cards (class 6 or faster) and maybe a nice bag. Go shoot a thousand photos to figure out which direction you want to expand your photography (which will determine which equipment you want to add to your kit.

I have sold cameras for some years now and it is my opinion that Canons aren't the best are far as usability is concerned. I'm not saying they are terrible mind you, but I believe Nikons to be easier to the newbie. Both brands make excellent cameras based on technical merit - great picture quality, well built products, great selection of lenses. I am not a pro, I only own a D40 - because really, it does all I need it do. And I'm a student who can't afford to spend thousands upon thousands on higher end gear

If you were to ask me right now which brand to get as a newbie photographer, I would say opt for the Nikon. But then I would say, don't be a fool - go visit a camera store first and play with these cameras in your hands first and foremost. You could bring an SD card if you'd like to compare photos between the cameras but really, at this level, there isn't much to complain about.

With a D40, an entry system would be the camera body, an 18-55mm wide zoom, the 55-200 VR for telephoto, and the 35mm AF-S.With a Rebel, an entry system would be the body, the 18-55 wide zoom, the 55-250 IS for telephoto, and the 50mm prime.

Lastly, for the Nikons, if you were to find/buy older lenses from yesteryear, you will need a D70/80/90/200/300 and so on; the D40/60/3000/5000 cannot autofocus these older lenses, you will have to manual focus. If you're not going to be buying older lenses, then this is moot point.

While you can't auto-focus older lenses on the D40, you can focus them manually -- nearly every SLR lens Nikon has manufactured since 1959 except the ones that require the mirror to be locked up (the D40's mirror can't do that and would be damaged). The D40 auto-focuses only with lenses designated as "AF-S" which include an internal focus motor. Nikon's so-called "screw-driver" AF lenses depend on a motor with a mechanical linkage -- the screwdriver -- built into the camera's body -- something the D40 doesn't have. But, again, they do focus manually.

One other note: Nikon's flash exposure system is second to none, easily an order of magnitude better than any other integrated flash exposure system on the market.

Canon and Nikon are both good. In terns of sensor technology, they tend to leap-frog each other. And in terms of bodies. they are just holders for the sensor. If you catch the bug and stick with [D]SLR photography, it's the lenses that are important. Bodies/sensors are like computers; lenses are essentially forever. Shoot and enjoy. Then, based on your interests, build an arsenal of lenses tailored to your shooting needs.

Architecture? There are lenses for that. Landscapes? There are lenses for that. Macro? There are lenses for that. Portraiture? There are lenses for that. Travel? There are lenses for that. Wildlife? There are lenses for that. The App store has nothing on the [D]SLR industry.

I would not get a D40, the biggest problem with them is they have a horrendous auto focusing system. A camera that takes blurry out of focus pictures is worth nothing.

After reading MANY reviews and user opinions on the D40, i have not once read anywhere that the D40 has a horrendous autofocusing system. And as a owner of a D40 with thousands of shots taken, the autofocus system has performed great with the stock lens kit and a 35mm f1.8 prime. Aside from situations of where you are shooting a subject behind bars/chain link fence and such, any camera is going to have a hard time focusing in this instance. And it also depends on the camera/lens combo, i've used my D40 with a Sigma prime and the autofocus was generally poor and slow, while with Nikon lenses it has been quick and accurate.

To the OP, as an amateur photographer and an owner of a D40, it is a great camera for those who are starting out. Generally, when buying a DSLR, you are buying into a system a lenses as many have said before. Going with either Canon or Nikon - you can't go wrong, so whatever you find a better deal on, go with it. And generally, as a beginner, don't expect to make prize winning images off the bat; ANY modern DSLR, including the D40, is capable of taking amazing pictures, but it is up to the photographer to use the camera to its full potential. For a beginner such as myself and yourself, the D40 is no slouch, has amazing image quality, and generally enough of the features that beginners actually need. When you learn how to use the camera, that is when you could (or should) step up to a D80/D300 and when the budget allows of coarse.

It's not so much that the D40 has a "horrendous" autofocus but rather the autofocus, and a number of aspects of the camera, are simply aged. The D40 only has 3 focus points and that can be limiting at times but nothing major for someone getting into photography. With that said I wouldn't buy a D40 anymore unless you can get it cheap. I purchased mine for $250 (used) and I'd probably look for cheaper now.

I'm a bit of a fan of buying used. KEH.com currently has a couple of Canon Rebel XSI + 18-55mm IS lenses in the $500 range. Considering the improvements in the XSI over the XS I'd go with that. I purchased my D40 from KEH and was happy all around, just pay attention to what they state is included before you buy if you decide to go that route.

Agreed. The D40 is somewhat primitive compared to currently-available DSLRs.

Nikon's mid-range and professional cameras are excellent. Be aware that you'll generally spend slightly more for Nikon equipment than for comparable Canon equipment. The price disparity will bite especially hard if you get a D40, D60, D3000 or D5000 and have to buy only the more expensive AF-S lenses rather than the older AF D design without the focus motor in the lens.

Here are some popular currently-offered lenses with prices from B&H to illustrate. In the used market, you'll find more AF D lenses, including discontinued models.

It's not so much that the D40 has a "horrendous" autofocus but rather the autofocus, and a number of aspects of the camera, are simply aged.

True, but it also has benefits in excellent exposure calculation (better than the better-in-other-respects D70s, and better than the Rebel line up to at least the XTi) and is pretty damn good in ISO noise for such an older body (the fewer pixels means less processing power to lose the noise; the D40x and D60 aren't as good). I also found it a bit more consistent when set in a Priority or Auto mode.

But you're right, there are definitely trade-offs. If I were buying all over again, I wouldn't go for a D40, or a Rebel, because I'm a shill for the built-in flash Commander, but that's an example of specific needs. For most people/most photography, just about any Rebel (even the original!) or any D40/D50/D70 or equivalent can take some awesome pictures, and they'll definitely help one learn what they want most out of a camera and make better buying decisions should they choose to upgrade in the future.

And generally, as a beginner, don't expect to make prize winning images off the bat; ANY modern DSLR, including the D40, is capable of taking amazing pictures, but it is up to the photographer to use the camera to its full potential.

Word. I've actually been shooting pictures and using image-editing software for years, so I've got some general background in lighting, composition, color manipulation, subject distance, etc. The trick is going to be learning how to make an SLR capture the right thing in realtime.

This one's a bit out of your price range, but it's a good deal, too:http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1795595$615 and free shipping for Canon EOS Rebel XSi + 18-55mm IS kit lens + 55-250mm IS telephoto zoom lensYou could get another 3% Bing cash back to bring it under $600.

When you're ready to buy, there will be another deal somewhere. Amazon, B&H or Adorama usually have at least one running.